Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News

Tuesday, November 19, 2019

Official complaint against American University of Beirut NYC branch not admitting Israelis

One of the best institutions of higher education in the Arab world is violating American law by not letting Israelis sign up for its online courses, according to a complaint filed Friday to the New York City Commission on Human Rights.

Israeli activist and attorney Yifa Segal said she was unable to sign up for a global health program with the American University of Beirut because the signup screen didn’t include Israel as a nationality option. She tried to enroll not because she is interested in global health, but because she knew she would likely be unsuccessful, and wanted to challenge the school on legal grounds.

Lebanon doesn’t recognize Israel and forbids its citizens from even speaking with Israelis, so it’s not surprising that AUB wouldn’t let Israelis take its classes. But while AUB’s campus is in Lebanon, it has an office in New York City. It is recognized by the New York state government and the regional university accreditation authority. The complaint accuses the university of violating New York City laws. Experts consulted by the Forward said the school might be violating state and federal laws as well.

“You can’t come in from China and offer a program to whites only,” said Professor Peter F. Lake, director of the Center for Excellence in Higher Education Law and Policy at Stetson University.

Here is the full text of the complaint provided to me by David Abrams, one of the lawyers that filed the complaint:

1. I, Yifa Segal am an Israeli national and human rights activist. I am associated with the International Legal Forum, which is an Israeli organization dedicated to promoting peace, justice, and equality in the Middle East.
2. I regularly travel to New York and in fact I intend to visit New York in December.
3. I understand that Respondent American University of Beirut ("AUB") is a New York university with its main campus located in Beirut Lebanon. I understand that AUB regularly holds events at its "Debs Center" in New York.
4. AUB maintains a Global Health Institute ("GHI") which offers online courses and diplomas through its GHI Academy. These courses and diplomas are offered to the general public and many of them concern matters of interest to me.
5. For example, there is a course in Humanitarian Law and Human Rights; a diploma in Humanitarian Leadership; and various offerings which concern the Middle East and North Africa region, which is of course where I reside.
6. I understand that all of these courses are offered to the general public.
7. The next time I am in New York, I would like to register for and participate in such a course.
8. To be clear, I am motivated in large part by my desire to fight against boycotts of Israel and to break down barriers against Israeli participation in international trade and cultural exchange. Nevertheless, I stand ready willing and able to take one of the Defendant's online classes if I am permitted to.
9. Accordingly, I attempted to register with the GHI Academy however the online system asked my nationality but there was no choice on the menu for "Israeli." Thus, I was unable to complete the online registration form.
10. I sent e-mails to AUB requesting, among other things, that this problem be fixed and that I be permitted to register however I received no response.
11. I understand that there is a lot of anti-Israeli sentiment in Lebanon and I believe that for this reason AUB has decided to discriminate against Israeli nationals even though it is a New York university with its headquarters in New York.
12. I respectfully submit that as a provider of public accommodation in New York, it is impermissible for AUB to discriminate in this way against Israeli nationals.
13. Accordingly, I charge AUB with unlawful discrimination on the basis of citizenship and national origin.
14. I also charge AUB with taking part in a discriminatory boycott.
15. I have not commenced any other civil or criminal action, nor do I have an action pending before any administrative agency under any other law of this state based upon this same unlawful discriminatory practice.___________________________________

Yifa Segal

Interestingly, AUB claims to have a non-discrimination policy that applies to Lebanon as well as the US. I could not find where it applies to admissions, however.

We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.

Pompeo is right - stopping claiming that settlements are illegal can help peace (full text and comments)

Here is what Secretary of State Pompeo said in his remarks Monday about Israel:

U.S. public statements on settlement activities in the West Bank have been inconsistent over decades. In 1978, the Carter administration categorically concluded that Israel’s establishment of civilian settlements was inconsistent with international law. However, in 1981, President Reagan disagreed with that conclusion and stated that he didn’t believe that the settlements were inherently illegal.

Subsequent administrations recognized that unrestrained settlement activity could be an obstacle to peace, but they wisely and prudently recognized that dwelling on legal positions didn’t advance peace. However, in December 2016, at the very end of the previous administration, Secretary Kerry changed decades of this careful, bipartisan approach by publicly reaffirming the supposed illegality of settlements.

After carefully studying all sides of the legal debate, this administration agrees with President Reagan. The establishment of Israeli civilian settlements in the West Bank is not per se inconsistent with international law.

I want to emphasize several important considerations.

First, look, we recognize that – as Israeli courts have – the legal conclusions relating to individual settlements must depend on an assessment of specific facts and circumstances on the ground. Therefore, the United States Government is expressing no view on the legal status of any individual settlement.

The Israeli legal system affords an opportunity to challenge settlement activity and assess humanitarian considerations connected to it. Israeli courts have confirmed the legality of certain settlement activities and has concluded that others cannot be legally sustained.

Second, we are not addressing or prejudging the ultimate status of the West Bank. This is for the Israelis and the Palestinians to negotiate. International law does not compel a particular outcome, nor create any legal obstacle to a negotiated resolution.

Third, the conclusion that we will no longer recognize Israeli settlements as per se inconsistent with international law is based on the unique facts, history, and circumstances presented by the establishment of civilian settlements in the West Bank. Our decision today does not prejudice or decide legal conclusions regarding situations in any other parts of the world.

And finally – finally – calling the establishment of civilian settlements inconsistent with international law hasn’t worked. It hasn’t advanced the cause of peace.

The hard truth is there will never be a judicial resolution to the conflict, and arguments about who is right and wrong as a matter of international law will not bring peace. This is a complex political problem that can only be solved by negotiations between the Israelis and the Palestinians.

The United States remains deeply committed to helping facilitate peace, and I will do everything I can to help this cause. The United States encourages the Israelis and the Palestinians to resolve the status of Israeli settlements in the West Bank in any final status negotiations.

And further, we encourage both sides to find a solution that promotes, protects the security and welfare of Palestinians and Israelis alike.

And then in answering a question:

... We’ve had a long time with the policy, the legal interpretation announced today being the other way and it didn’t work. That – that’s a fact in evidence. We believe that what we’ve done today is we have recognized the reality on the ground. We’ve now declared that settlements are not per se illegal under international law, and we have provided the very space that your question suggests, the very space for Israel and the Palestinians to come together to find a political solution to this very, very vexing problem.

We think, in fact, we’ve increased the likelihood that the vision for peace that this administration has, we think we’ve created space for that to be successful. I’m hopeful that we’ll be able to move forward on that before too terribly long.

Pompeo is right. The supposed "illegality" of settlements allows the Palestinians to not work towards peace, They have been sitting back for more than a decade hoping for some international body to hand them the West Bank. They've refused peace offers. This strategy is a failure.

The anti-Israel crowd is claiming that this will allow Israel to take over the West Bank with settlements. No, that won't happen. Israel doesn't want to rule Palestinian Arabs. If the legal threat is removed, it gives both parties a chance to actually negotiate and make some choices - if Palestinians really want a state.

I'm not convinced they do, but this gives them a chance to show it, instead of hiding behind the threat of going to the International Court of Justice or getting the next zillion UN resolutions in their favor.

I'm sure Europe is not on board with this, and in fact the Palestinians have been able to rely on the EU to be a more reliable ally in this issue than the Arab states themselves. But that position is eroding. Just as the Arabs have gotten fed up with the Palestinian issue, so Europe will go. It cannot happen soon enough.

Despite the self-anointed "experts" who have been acting like the Oslo process is still alive, this decision by the US can and should push Palestinian leaders to realize that time is not on their side and to act accordingly. Up until now they have been smug and acting like they have the upper hand. This strategy of waiting for others to push Israel to do what Palestinians want has sustained the Palestinian leadership.

What the Palestinians need is a realization that time is not on their side. The sooner they negotiate, the sooner they accept a Jewish state as a permanent neighbor, the sooner there could be real peace.

The peace process has been stuck in the same pattern for a long time. The idea that Israel can be pressured to do things that are against its best interests has been shown to be false.

One other positive from this decision is that it helps slow down the demonization of Jews who want to live in their ancestral lands.

I recently pointed out that the UN puts "settlers" into a different category as victims of conflict than "civilians." There is no precedent for this in international law. But it helps normalize the idea that somehow Jews who choose to live in their ancetral lands are less deserving of human rights, a little less than human themselves. This decision, by giving the "settlers" the same human rights as everyone else, helps erase what was a frankly disgusting excuse for Palestinian terror.

Now the world can start to look at Judea and Samaria as an issue of competing rights, not of Jews taking away rights from Palestinians. That narrative was never true and it just made Israel less likely to trust any international body.

When Israel is treated fairly by the world, and when Palestinians finally learn to co-exist with the Jewish state, then peace would be fairly easy. Unfortunately, neither of those are likely to happen for a very long time. Even so, this US move is a welcome step in the right direction.

We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.

11/18 Links Pt2: JPost Editorial: Don’t vote Corbyn; David Collier: Exposed – the true face of the Palestinian cause; Maajid Nawaz explains why anti-semitism is the 'most dangerous' form of racism

From Ian:

In major shift, US set to rescind stance on illegality of settlements

US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo is expected to announce on Monday that the US is softening its position on Israeli settlements in the West Bank, the latest in a series of Trump administration moves that weaken Palestinian claims to statehood.

Pompeo plans to repudiate a 1978 State Department legal opinion that held that civilian settlements in the West Bank are “inconsistent with international law.” The move will likely anger Palestinians and put the US at odds with other nations working to end the conflict.

The Trump administration views the opinion, the basis for long-standing US opposition to expanding the settlements, as a distraction and believes any legal questions about the issue should be addressed by Israeli courts, according to a draft of Pompeo’s remarks on the policy obtained by The Associated Press.

“Calling the establishment of civilian settlements inconsistent with international law has not advanced the cause of peace,” Pompeo says in the draft. “The hard truth is that there will never be a judicial resolution to the conflict, and arguments about who is right and who is wrong as a matter of international law will not bring peace.”

US administration moves that have weakened Palestinian efforts to achieve statehood have included US President Donald Trump’s decision to recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, the movement of the US embassy to that city, and the closure of the Palestinian diplomatic office in Washington.

“The establishment of Israeli civilian settlements in the West Bank is not, per se, inconsistent with international law,” Secretary of State Mike Pompeo says in a departure from the U.S.' Obama-era position pic.twitter.com/3C7aRtPNSp
— Bloomberg TicToc (@tictoc) November 18, 2019

JPost Editorial: Don’t vote Corbyn

In the weeks leading up to the December 12 general election in the UK, more and more efforts are being made to sound the alarm and make non-Jewish voters aware of the systemic antisemitism in the Labour Party.

Last week, a group of well-known British intellectuals and artists – none of whom are Jewish, and many of whom do not plan to vote for the Conservative Party – wrote an open letter urging voters to reject Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn. Among the signatories were spy novelist John le Carré, historians Antony Beevor and Tom Holland, Muslims Against Antisemitism head Ghanem Nuseibeh, and writer Maajid Nawaz.

“The coming election is momentous for every voter, but for British Jews it contains a particular anguish: the prospect of a prime minister steeped in association with antisemitism,” the letter reads. “Under Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership, Labour has come under formal investigation by the Equality and Human Rights Commission for institutional racism against Jews. Two Jewish MPs have been bullied out of the party. Mr. Corbyn has a long record of embracing antisemites as comrades.”

“Antisemitism is racism,” Nawaz wrote on Twitter. “Antisemitism is the *only* form of racism that unites all fascists: far-left, far-right & theocratic Islamists. This is why antisemitism is the most dangerous form of racism...There were always excuses made for Jew hate in Europe. Do not make excuses for it...Do not betray Jews.”

Maajid Nawaz explains why anti-semitism is the 'most dangerous' form of racism

LBC's Maajid Nawaz has explained why he believes anti-semitism is the "most dangerous" form of racism in a heated debate.

Caller John, from Suffolk, said he was "confused" as he thought saying anti-semitism was the "most dangerous" form of racism was an "idiotic argument".

John added he thought this was because "all racism is equal" and happens all over the world.

Explaining his reasoning, Maajid said: "The far left, the far right and Islamists, all three of them, campaign, propagate and recruit on an anti-semitic basis.

"Therefore unlike other forms of racism that I may suffer, the far-left don't campaign and propagate anti-brown or black racism, they pretend to be defenders of it while propagating anti-semitic racism.

"The far right don't propagate anti-white, say, racism but they do propagate anti-semitism just like the far left.

"The Islamist theocrats aren't recruiting people based on anti-black racism, though obviously anti-black racism exists in the Arab world, but they do recruit people on the basis of anti-semitic racist tropes.

UN envoy Danon slams Bernie Sanders's Israel comments

Israeli Ambassador to the UN Danny Danon didn’t mince words when slamming Bernie Sanders’s recent remarks about US aid to Israel on Sunday night.

Speaking at the Zionist Organization of America (ZOA) gala in New York City, Danon said: “Mr. Sanders, a few months on a kibbutz in 1963 can only teach you so much." He was referring to the Vermont senator’s brief time at an Israeli kibbutz near Haifa in his youth.

Danon then attacked Sanders for comments he made during the J Street Annual conference in Washington, DC last month. There, Sanders declared that some of the $3.8 billion in aid the US allocates to Israel, should be given to the Gazan people as well.

“My solution is, to Israel, if you want military aid you’re going to have to fundamentally change your relationship to the people of Gaza,” Sanders said. “I would say that some of the $3.8 billion should go right now to humanitarian aid in Gaza.”

Finding that stance absurd, Danon said such a belief would “undermine the security of both Israel and the US”

“Perhaps Mr. Sanders didn’t hear about Israel leaving Gaza in 2005,” he said. “Maybe he hasn’t had the chance to visit the Kerem Shalom crossing, where hundreds of trucks pass daily to provide humanitarian aid to Gaza. Maybe he doesn’t know about the terror tunnels.”

“[Sanders] is suggesting to give less military assistance to the United States’ most important ally in the Middle East in order to give it to Hamas, a terrorist organization that celebrated the tragedy of 9/11,” he continued.

Danon vowed to fight against these “radical” voices threatening Israel.

One of the keys to strategic thinking is to never ignore or pretend away things that are objectively true, even if they represent a setback for your cause.

With that in mind, there is no way to consider last week’s decision by the European Union to uphold labeling of products originating in disputed territories as anything other than a setback. While it is not clear how EU member nations will respond to this latest outrage from regulators in Brussels, or whether such a labeling process will have any actual economic impact on the Jewish state, the notion that EU officials would bend their own rules in order to enact something so manifestly unfair is not a good sign regarding Israel’s relationship with the continent (currently its largest trading partner).

In many ways, the decision is quintessentially European, illustrating the chasm between the principles its leaders profess and the ones elites on the continent actually live by.

If you were to ask anyone who claims faith in multi-national governance, they would no doubt wax poetic about how the EU has replaced rule of force by rule of law, turning a continent that was once the focal point of global mayhem into a set of states ready to negotiate, rather than go to war over political differences. Yet by voting to label goods from one and only one “occupied” territory (with those same bureaucrats determining what that words means) and never even considering using that decision to establish a general principle (which could get them into trouble with powerful nations like China and Turkey – a country that occupies the soil of an EU member) the EU has effectively walked away from the rule of law that is its reason to exist.

Taking action against the truly powerful usually brings immediate consequences, which is why the “courageous” leaders of Europe tend to avoid ticking off those who might respond in forceful or costly ways. China, after all, has far more economic clout than does tiny Israel (regardless of the Jewish state’s recent economic success) and has shown willingness to come down hard on anyone who criticizes them. And Turkey not only continues to occupy European territory in Cyprus but has already threatened to flood the continent with refugees if their political behavior is punished in any way.

In contrast, Israel can only lodge complaints alongside similar ones voiced by diaspora groups pointing out the hypocrisy of Europe’s latest foray into Middle East politics. Even with high levels of support in the White House and, at least for now, Congress, it is unlikely the US will prioritize creating a price tag for Europe’s latest outrage against both Israel and the rule of law. This leaves Israel and her supporters relying on forceful arguments and moral suasion in a fight against bureaucrats using those words to dress up a power play.

Now there are other cards Israel and her friends can play in such a situation. For example, the recent labeling attack on Israel might be a way to give European leaders cover as they continue to reevaluate decades of investment in their Palestinian “partners” through massive infusions of cash into organizations like UNWRA. In an era when the US and several European countries have decided that corrupt organization no longer warrants support, we might be reaching a moment when UNWRA’s long-overdue abolishment (or folding of the organization into the other UN refugee agency UNHCR) might actually be on the table.

For NGOs and others pushing such an agenda, the EU’s labeling decision could be used as leverage to push the EU into investigating UNWRA funding by claiming such an investigation would give the Union the opportunity to demonstrate “balance” given their seemingly one-sided take on the labeling issue.

Another strategy would be to present the recent labeling decision not as an attack on Israel, but as an attack on the very principles that underlie the credibility of the EU itself. Given the mayhem caused by one nation (Britain) deciding that it no longer wants to have its affairs managed by Brussels, getting more European countries to question the legitimacy of EU dictates would be a consequence even the most anti-Israel bureaucrats would find hard to ignore.

At the end of the day, there is but one Jewish state and a mere twelve-million Jews worldwide, most of whom are not mobilized for war against even those who have declared war against us. This means we should not fantasize about having options only available to the more numerous, rich, powerful, and highly mobilized enemies. We will not be able to get the UN to pass dozens of resolutions condemning our foes on an annual basis, nor are we likely to get Europe to start using our vocabulary (such as “disputed” vs. “occupied”) by leveraging our numbers or our power, both of which are highly limited. Nor should we ever expect those institutions to fess up to, much less act to reverse, their hypocrisy.

But we can use what influence we have strategically, just as the Israeli military has combined its military power with creative precision to defeat far more numerous and powerful enemies for generations. For victory goes not to those who win every battle, but to the those who wins the most important ones (including the last one).

We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.

To all two-staters: Take this simple challenge

To everyone who insists that the only solution to the conflict is two states, Israel and Palestine, living together side by side, please answer this:

Outside of a very few individual and outstanding Palestinians like Bassem Eid - Palestinians who are vilified by the mainstream as being sellouts - no Palestinian leader is interested in real peace, nor has there ever been one.

The most "dovish" Palestinians do not accept Israel as a Jewish state. Polls show that most Palestinians look at the two state solution as a stage towards gaining all of Israel. The Palestinian consensus, bizarrely, is not for Palestine to be a place of refuge and citizenship for the Palestinian "diaspora" but rather that those Palestinians move to the hated enemy state of Israel. The reason is obvious and has nothing to do with human rights - they want to eliminate the Jewish state demographically.

Since Oslo, Palestinians have taught their children that Israel is a permanent part of the region, but that it is all theirs, and they will conquer it all one day. That's over 25 years of children being indoctrinated into hate and no desire to allow a Jewish state to exist.

Please find me a counterexample showing a real desire for real peace by any part of the Palestinian establishment. Ever.

You can't.

Given this, why is Israel consistently being pressured to compromise with people who truly do not accept Israel except as a temporary aberration of history that they will eventually conquer?

I want a real answer from J-Street, or Peter Beinart, or Truah Rabbis or B'Tselem or anyone. Is there anything in my analysis that is wrong? Is there some underground Palestinian majority of potential leaders who really want peace with Israel?

Now, Israel has no desire to rule over a few million non-resident Arabs. It never did. But look at what happened with Gaza - Israel washed its hands of the sector but the world still insists that Israel is responsible for it. So even those more-realistic dovish Jews who want Israel to disengage from most of the West Bank unilaterally are engaged in wishful thinking that the world would not still consider the entire area "occupied."

The only possible way a two state solution can work is if the Palestinians take responsibility for truly wanting peace, and teaching it to their people. If the only Palestinian state imaginable is one where Jews who want to visit their holy sites under Arab rule are fearful for their lives, then that is not a state that anyone should want - and it would not bring any peace. There are a lot of lessons to be learned from Joseph's Tomb in Nablus.

But if that is the only viable possibility for a two state solution, then why is nobody from the left working with Palestinians to accept the reality of a permanent Jewish state? Why doesn't Europe pressure Palestinians to teach their children peace? Why is it accepted that Palestinians can boycott any Israeli peace initiative in the name of "anti-normalization?"

If a Palestine could exist where Jews felt safe, then peace would come very quickly thereafter. "Settlements" would be no problem because Jews who wanted to stay would be allowed to become citizens without fear.

There is no path to peace by pressuring the one side that has shown a desire for peace. The only way is to change the Palestinian vision from one of conquest to one of coexistence and peace with Israel and with Jews.

If the two-staters really and truly want peace, there is only one side to pressure. That absence of pressure - in fact, the tacit or explicit support for their intransigence - is the only real obstacle to peace.

I know that most left-leaning Jews who study this topic truly want peace. Yet they all seem to be stuck in a strange mindset that "if only Israel would do X, then there will be peace." Where is the evidence? What has ever happened in the past 100 years to lend credence to those assumptions that Palestinians respond favorably to Israeli concessions with good will? There is a difference between real analysis and wishful thinking.

But please - if I'm wrong, explain it to me.

We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.

11/18 Links Pt1: Why the status quo is the least bad option for Palestinians; The Middle East in flux: Eight trends; 154 U.N. nations call Temple Mount solely by Muslim name

From Ian:

Evelyn Gordon: Why the status quo is the least bad option for Palestinians

Even among people who recognize that Israeli-Palestinian peace is currently impossible, a growing number think that Israel must nevertheless quit the West Bank. Israel has a right to defend itself, their argument goes, but not by controlling another people for decades. Instead, it should withdraw to the “internationally recognized border” and protect itself from there, as other countries do.

Forget for a moment that the “internationally recognized border” is an arrant fiction. Forget as well that Israel remains in the West Bank precisely because defending itself from the 1949 armistice lines (the abovementioned fictional border) hasn’t worked very well in either the West Bank—from which Israel partially withdrew in the 1990s before returning the following decade—or the Gaza Strip.

That still leaves another uncomfortable fact: As long as genuine peace remains impossible, Israeli control of the West Bank, despite the undeniable hardships it causes Palestinians, remains the least bad alternative for the Palestinians themselves. As evidence, just compare the Israeli-controlled West Bank to Gaza, which has been free of both settlers and soldiers since August 2005. By almost any parameter, life in the former is far better.

Take, for instance, casualties. According to B’Tselem’s statistics, Israeli security forces killed 5,706 Palestinians in Gaza from September 2005 through August 2019. That’s almost eight times the 756 killed by Israeli security personnel and settlers combined in the West Bank during this period (no Gazans were killed by settlers since there are no settlers there).

Nor is this surprising. Israel’s control of the West Bank means that suspected terrorists can often be arrested rather than killed, though shootouts (with attendant collateral damage) do occur. But in Gaza, where Israel has no troops, it can’t arrest terrorists. Thus the only way to fight terror is through military action, which naturally produces many more casualties among both combatants and civilians.

Daniel Pipes: The Middle East in flux: Eight trends

As ever, the Middle East is monumentally in flux. As usual, most developments are negative. Here’s a guide:
Water replaces petroleum as the key liquid: oil and gas still provide nearly 60% of the world’s energy, but this number is declining and even the wealthiest oil producers are feeling the pinch (“GCC states look to new taxes as oil revenues remain weak”). Contrarily, tensions over water are becoming a major source of international tensions (e.g., Turkey vs. Syria, Ethiopia vs. Egypt) and a driving force of domestic change (the Syrian revolt of 2011). It’s also a potential cause of massive migration; a former Iranian minister of agriculture predicts that water shortages will force up to 70% of the country’s population, or 57 million Iranians, to emigrate.

Anarchy replaces tyranny: of course, some tyrannies remain, notably in Turkey and Iran, but anarchy has become the region’s greater bane, including whole countries (Libya, Yemen, Syria) and parts of others (e.g., Sinai). Though generally less threatening to the outside world, anarchy is an even more miserable personal experience than tyranny, for it lacks guidelines. As a 13th century Koran scholar noted, “A year of the sultan’s tyranny does less harm than a moment of the people’s anarchy.”

The failure of Arab youths’ efforts to make improvements: around 1970, many Arabic-speaking countries began an era of corrupt strongman rule. Starting in Tunisia in December 2010, efforts to overthrow the old order have shaken governments but had few beneficial consequences. In some cases (Libya, Yemen, Syria), they led to civil war; in another (Egypt), they merely brought on a younger strongman. Recent uprisings in Algeria, Sudan, Iraq, and Lebanon have yet to conclude but odds are they, too, will end badly.

The decline of Islamism: after peaking in about 2012, the radical attempt to apply Islamic law severely and in full has lost ground in the Middle East. Several factors account for this: a fear of wild-eyed fanatics like Boko Haram, Shabaab, ISIS, and the Taliban; the dismal experience of Muslim peoples who have lived under Islamist rule (e.g., Egypt in 2012-13); and the fracturing of Islamists (e.g., in Syria) into competing and hostile factions. What might come after Islamism is unclear, but after a century of failure with it and other extremist ideologies (including fascism and communism), an era of anti-ideology might lie ahead.

PMW: PMW Special Report: Israel must implement 2nd half of anti-“Pay-for-Slay” law before the end of 2019

Israel must deduct from transfers to PA in 2019 an additional 241 million shekels - the amount the PA paid to families of terrorist “Martyrs” in 2018

- 5 years ago today, two terrorists murdered 6 Israelis with knives and axes in a synagogue in West Jerusalem. The victims included rabbis, American citizens, and an Israeli Druze policeman. The terrorists were killed during their attack.
- Since the massacre, the PA has paid the families of these terrorist murderers no less than 204,000 shekels (almost $60,000) simply because their relatives murdered Israelis.
- Israeli law demands that Israel deduct from tax transfers to the PA in 2019 the amount that the PA paid in 2018 to terrorist prisoners and to families of dead terrorists – so-called “Martyrs.”
- Since February, the Israeli government has been deducting approximately 41 million shekels each month, 1/12 of the amount the PA paid to terrorist prisoners in 2018, which was 502 million shekels.
- In order to comply with Israeli law, the government must also deduct the full amount paid to families of dead terrorists by the end of 2019.
- This PMW special report shows that the additional amount that Israel must deduct from its tax transfers to the PA in the next two months is at least 241 million shekels – the sum the PA paid to families of dead terrorist “Martyrs” in 2018.
- PMW has calculated that there are at least 5,666 dead terrorists who were killed from September 2000 to the end of 2018 and whose families received an estimated 95 million shekels ($25.4 million) from the PA in 2018.

Iran's Supreme Leader says Jews are thriving in Iran. Demographics disagree.

A tweet from Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei:

The size of Iran's Jewish population since 1947 (based on Wikipedia):

The vast majority of Iran's Jews don't seem to feel safe enough to stay.

But what do they know?

We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.

The Neturei Karta is a tiny fringe group of Orthodox Jewish-appearing people that thrives on publicity for its anti-Israel, pro-Islamist political positions.

One of its leaders, Yisroel Meir Hirsch, recently released a video that has been shown on Palestinian TV, in Hebrew with English subtitles, where he repeats the NK position that Zionism is evil and Palestinian Arabs are the only people with a right to the land.

The most interesting part is at the end, where Hirsch says, that the whole world will worship Allah together, inshallah (Arabic for God willing.)

Hirsch also attacked J-Street for being too Zionist: "We also wish to clarify here that the position of J-Street and such like-minded organizations do not represent the Jewish people and are certainly not benefiting the Palestinian people. The entirety of their position is a lie and a diversion tactic against those who seek peace and justice, as they promote a false discourse of rights which totally rejects the basic rights of Palestinians."

Neturei Karta has traveled to Iran to attend the "International Conference to Review the Global Vision of the Holocaust." It issued a leaflet supporting the murder of Jews in the Chabad in Mumbai. Every major Orthodox Jewish group, including the anti-Zionist Satmar Hasidim, have strongly condemned Neturei Karta for allying itself with the murderers of Jews.

(h/t YWN)

We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.

Islamic Jihad recruiting sons, younger brothers of "martyrs"

Here is a photo from a memorial service of Khaled Moawad Farraj, 39, showing what appears to be his son dressed in a uniform and with a gun.

This photo is from a similar memorial service of Yousef Rizk Khalil Abu Kamil, 35, which shows what appears to be his son and younger brother again dressed like jihadis and the older one with a weapon.

Recruiting child soldier is against international law. And it is child abuse.

But people who pretend to be attuned to these sorts of outrages seem to have a blind spot when it is done by jihadists.

We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.

University of Toronto students' union against kosher food on campus - because "Zionists" want it

In case you still didn't think that BDS was antisemitic....

A Toronto student union has refused to support a drive to make kosher food accessible on campus because its backers are “pro-Israel.”

Last week, a Jewish student wrote to the University of Toronto Graduate Students’ Union (GSU), asking it to consider supporting an ongoing campaign by Hillel to secure kosher food access on campus. In response, the student was told: “I doubt the Executive Committee will be comfortable recommending this motion given that the organisation hosting it (Hillel) is openly pro-Israel.”

The response email added that any move to support the kosher food campaign could be contrary to “the will of the membership,” an apparent reference to the GSU’s adoption of the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) Movement targeting the Jewish State in 2012.

The GSU is the only student union in Canada with a committee dedicated to promoting the BDS Movement.

On Sunday, B’nai Brith wrote to officials at the University, asking them to swiftly condemn the GSU’s stance on the kosher food initiative, ensure that the complaint against the GSU BDS Committee is expedited, and work to make kosher food more accessible on campus.

Here is Hillel's press release.

The BDSers are effectively saying that as long as Jews support Israel, they should starve.

We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.

11/17 Links: It's time to ban the PA from international football like Iran was banned from international judo; UK Labor candidate behind Facebook group defending alleged Holocaust deniers

From Ian:

Trump Administration Vows To Fight EU Decision To Put Warning Labels On Jewish Products

The origins of the legal dispute stretch back several years to when the EU issued a mandate in 2015 declaring that products produced in the West Bank and Golan Heights be labeled as coming from an Israeli settlement, facially for the purpose of promoting “consumer protection,” although it’s unclear if that is actually achieved here. In late 2016, France became the first EU member state to attempt to enforce the mandate, resulting in the Israeli winery Psagot filing a lawsuit claiming that such a mandate violated the EU’s anti-discrimination laws.

Under the new rule, goods produced by Jews will be labeled as having been produced in an Israeli settlement, while goods produced by Muslims may be labeled as made in “Palestine,” indicating blatant discriminatory treatment. Unsurprisingly, Israel’s presence in the West Bank and the Golan Heights are the only contested areas in the world to be the focus of the labeling ire of the EU.

“No other territory, occupied, disputed, or otherwise is subject to such requirements,” noted Eugene Kontorovich, director of the Center for International Law in the Middle East at George Mason University. Kontorovich emphasized the peculiarity of the ruling. “In no other case does any ‘origin labeling’ require any kind of statement about the political circumstances in the area. This is a special Yellow Star for Jewish products only.”

Indeed, there are a multitude of contested areas throughout the world that produce goods for which the EU has deemed politicized labeling requirements unnecessary. Despite Russia’s occupation of parts of Georgia or Morocco’s occupation of Western Sahara, nothing in EU law or greater international law requires labeling goods produced by Russia in occupied parts of Georgia as “Made in Georgia” or goods produced by Morocco in Western Sahara as “Made in Western Sahara.”

As Kontorovich explained on Twitter, “Products around the world are made in many situations that raise ‘ethical’ and legal questions, from Chinese prison labor factories to Moroccan drilling Sahrawi oil. Only such concern that requires labeling in EU is Jews living in neighborhoods where they are not ‘supposed’ to be.”

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX), who has led the fight against antisemitism on a federal level, echoed those thoughts: “This labeling singles out Jews who live in communities where Europeans don’t think they should be allowed to live and identifies them for boycotts.” The senator elaborated on the somber gravity of the EU ruling, declaring the decision to be “reminiscent of the darkest moments in Europe’s history.”

PMW: It's time to ban the PA from international football like Iran was banned from international judo

Compare:
Iranian Violation:
Iran refused to let its judo athlete compete against an Israeli athlete
IJF Punishment:
International Judo Federation immediately suspended Iran from all competitions

Palestinian Violation:
The Palestinian Football Association (PFA) refuses to let Palestinian players compete against Israelis
FIFA Punishment:
None - The International Federation of Football Association (FIFA) ignores the fundamental PFA violations

On October 22, the International Judo Federation showed its clear moral fiber by suspending the Iran Judo Federation "from all competitions, administrative and social activities organized or authorized by the IJF and its Unions, until the Iran Judo Federation gives strong guarantees and prove that they will respect the IJF Statutes and accept that their athletes fight against Israeli athletes."

The suspension followed Iran's forcing its athlete to withdraw from the Judo World Championships last August, rather than compete against an Israeli.

For years, the Palestinian Football Association (PFA) under Jibril Rajoub, President of the Palestinian Football Association and Head of the PLO Supreme Council for Youth and Sports, has prohibited Palestinian participation in any sporting event with Israel. Rajoub has also used Palestinian football to support and glorify terrorism; incite hatred and violence; and promote racism.

While Palestinian Media Watch has provided FIFA - the international football association - with all the proof necessary to penalize the PFA and to suspend its membership in FIFA, as well as to take disciplinary measures against Rajoub, to FIFA's great shame, it sadly lacks the moral clarity that was shown by the International Judo Federation, and only temporarily suspended Rajoub himself and has not yet penalized the PFA.

In the terminology of the Palestinian Authority, participating in any joint activities with Israelis, including sporting events, is called "normalization." It is strictly forbidden, and also when it comes to football.

UK PM Johnson: More must be done ‘to stamp out’ antisemitism

British Prime Minister Boris Johnson said that more must be done to eradicate antisemitism from modern society in the UK, and that the current government was investing in the protection of places of worship and in tolerance education.

Johnson made his comments in a letter to Jewish Agency Chairman Isaac Herzog, who wrote last month to the British prime minister expressing concern about rising antisemitism in Europe in the wake of the Halle, Germany, synagogue attack, and to call for heightened security measures at Jewish institutions.

Johnson’s letter comes as the UK is currently in the midst of a campaign leading to the December 12 election in which antisemitism has become a key issue, due to the failure of the Labour Party to adequately tackle the widespread antisemitism among its members at all levels of the party.

According to the annual report by the Community Security Trust in the UK, 2018 saw a record level of antisemitic incidents, following two other record-breaking years in 2017 and 2016.

“Please be assured of my resolute support for all aspects of Jewish life,” Johnson said in his letter to Herzog, adding that he had read “with a heavy heart” about the Halle synagogue shooting and other recent incidents of antisemitism in Europe.

“I completely agree that we need to do more to stamp this out and better protect our Jewish friends and neighbors,” the British prime minister said.

"You Gotta Start Somewhere" - The Comic Strip Series

Whenever you ask haters why they target Israel, they always claim that there is something uniquely evil about the Jewish state. But when you point out that Israel is not close to the worst in any area they can name, after weakly accusing you of "whataboutism," they fall back to the same answer.

We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.